2013-01-02 16:27 keltezéssel, Marko Kreen írta:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>> 2012-12-11 16:09 keltezéssel, Simon Riggs írta:
>>
>>> On 11 December 2012 12:18, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Such mechanism already exist - you just need to set
>>>>>> your PGresult pointer to NULL after each PQclear().
>>>>> So why doesn't PQclear() do that?
>>>>
>>>> Because then PQclear() would need a ** not a *. Do you want its
>>>> interface changed for 9.3 and break compatibility with previous versions?
>>> No, but we should introduce a new public API call that is safer,
>>> otherwise we get people continually re-inventing new private APIs that
>>> Do the Right Thing, as the two other respondents have shown.
>>>
>> How about these macros?
> * Use do { } while (0) around the macros to get proper statement behaviour.
> * The if() is not needed, both PQclear and PQfinish do it internally.
> * Docs
>
> Should the names show somehow that they are macros?
> Or is it enough that it's mentioned in documentation?
Done. The fact that these are macros is mentioned in the docs.
--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.dehttp://www.postgresql.at/